If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but would anyone else agree that had Rosberg been at Mercedes this year, neither Lewis nor Nico would have won the championship? Nico was a stronger (and more combative) teammate than Valteri. And I believe that while Hamilton would have outscored Nico, the two of them would have taken enough points off of each that neither would outscore Vettel (even with all of his many errors).

Just a passing thought.

"Every generation's memory is exactly as long as its own experience." --John Kenneth Galbraith

It's a fair question, but I don't think so. Hamilton is leading by 64pts atm, which is way too big a margin to have made a difference to Vettel. Rosberg wouldn't just be taking points off Hamilton, but Vettel as well. For example Australia, Vettel won due to fortunate circumstances. But you wouldn't think Rosberg would crash in qualifying like Bottas did. SO in that scenario, even if Rosberg qualified behind Hamilton, he'd be getting the benefit of the freebie win instead of Vettel.

It's a fair question, but I don't think so. Hamilton is leading by 64pts atm, which is way too big a margin to have made a difference to Vettel. Rosberg wouldn't just be taking points off Hamilton, but Vettel as well. For example Australia, Vettel won due to fortunate circumstances. But you wouldn't think Rosberg would crash in qualifying like Bottas did. SO in that scenario, even if Rosberg qualified behind Hamilton, he'd be getting the benefit of the freebie win instead of Vettel.

Fair point, but also keep in mind that Rosberg would most likely take more points off Hamilton than he would off Vettel. For instance, if Mercedes is the dominant car in a race and the final result is Rosberg-Hamilton-Vettel, Hamilton only gets +3 points on Vettel, as opposed to +7 if he won and Vettel was second. Of course Hamilton-Rosberg-Vettel means +10 for Hamilton as opposed to +7 with Vettel in second, but with a dominant Merc, you could easily have Hamilton-Bottas-Vettel instead, so there's not much of a difference.

Similarly, if Ferrari was the dominant car and Vettel were to end up in first, having Hamilton finish in fourth behind Räikkönen and Rosberg would result in a -13 point deficit, as opposed to -10 if he were to end in third.

If the Ferrari and Merc were on the same level, then eventually it would boil down to driver ability to have one finish in front of the other, but when car performance is the deciding factor, it's obvious that having two competing drivers will harm both their prospects.

That said, if you swapped Bottas for Rosberg AND kept all of Vettel's mistakes, I'm confident that the drivers' championship would have the same owner, even if most certainly Hamilton might have had to wait a while longer to celebrate it.

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but would anyone else agree that had Rosberg been at Mercedes this year, neither Lewis nor Nico would have won the championship? Nico was a stronger (and more combative) teammate than Valteri. And I believe that while Hamilton would have outscored Nico, the two of them would have taken enough points off of each that neither would outscore Vettel (even with all of his many errors).

Just a passing thought.

Quite true, it would have been something like the Alonso vs Hamilton pairing at Mclaren 2006. How Ferrari wished Bottas was much stronger this year.

It's a fair question, but I don't think so. Hamilton is leading by 64pts atm, which is way too big a margin to have made a difference to Vettel. Rosberg wouldn't just be taking points off Hamilton, but Vettel as well. For example Australia, Vettel won due to fortunate circumstances. But you wouldn't think Rosberg would crash in qualifying like Bottas did. SO in that scenario, even if Rosberg qualified behind Hamilton, he'd be getting the benefit of the freebie win instead of Vettel.

The damage to Hamilton would have happened in that period where the Mercedes was lagging behind the Ferrari. Rosberg may have taken enough points from Hamilton at that stage but not from Vettel in a faster Ferrari. I think, enough to cause the eventual gap to be very close or marginally ahead. At least for Vettel to be either slightly ahead or just behind Hamilton to force the fight to the last race.

There has never been a period where MB were "lagging" behind the Ferrari.

The question was fair enough. When you look at it in depth, there's no way Vettel's winning this championship. Within the realms of being reasonable, the current margin is too big.

Hamilton's leading by 64pts. Even if Hamilton/Bottas swapped positions every time they scored a 1-2 (4 times), that's 28 points you can knock off Hamilton's score, so then he'd be leading by 36, which is a comfortable position. Then you could talk about the Vettel's errors costing him the title.

Alternatively, I've already posted that Australia was a race Rosberg would've won on the safe assumption he wouldn't have crashed in qualifying like Bottas did, so that 7pts you can knock off Vettel. Dare I say, a more confident, experienced Rosberg might've got past Vettel in Bahrain.

It's a question better asked about 2017. But having looked at the points, the more pertinent question is whether Rosberg could've gone back to back.

There has never been a period where MB were "lagging" behind the Ferrari.

The question was fair enough. When you look at it in depth, there's no way Vettel's winning this championship. Within the realms of being reasonable, the current margin is too big.

Hamilton's leading by 64pts. Even if Hamilton/Bottas swapped positions every time they scored a 1-2 (4 times), that's 28 points you can knock off Hamilton's score, so then he'd be leading by 36, which is a comfortable position. Then you could talk about the Vettel's errors costing him the title.

Alternatively, I've already posted that Australia was a race Rosberg would've won on the safe assumption he wouldn't have crashed in qualifying like Bottas did, so that 7pts you can knock off Vettel. Dare I say, a more confident, experienced Rosberg might've got past Vettel in Bahrain.

It's a question better asked about 2017. But having looked at the points, the more pertinent question is whether Rosberg could've gone back to back.

You can call it unlucky and maybe it was, but they knew the rough roads were going to be hard on the cars - his team-mate drove a strategic rally to look after the car and finished on the podium as a...